New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1887-12-21
THE WESTERN UNION WINS,
VERDICT FOR $3.50, 1000 SET ASIDE.
the GENERAL TERM ORDERS NEW TRIAL
OPINIONS OF THE JUDGES.

rur GENERAL TERM ORDERS A NEW TRIAL
OPINIONS OF THE JUDGES
Tho verdict for $3.50 900, obtained by James II.
(oodse I'm his suit against the Western Union Tele
graph Company, has been set aside by the General
Term OF the supreme Court, and new trial has been
ordered Mr.. GOodsell, In his original complaint set
forth two causes OF action. He claimed that bal
ance Of S32, 900 due him from the Western Union
Company under contract, the responsibilities of
which had been assumed by that company but which
had originally boon made by Mr.. Goodscl with the
Atlantic and Pacific Telegraph Company for the dis
semination of the of his National Press Associa
ton lie also claimed SG30O0O damages for tho al
legged breach of that contract.
The report of ex-Judgo Spencer, referee, award
ing him Sl6777 Az with interest from July l, 1882
as the balance due him and giving him $220,306 as
damages, having been confirmed an appeal was taken
and the General Torn affirmed the finding in regard to
the balance due, but reversed that as to the damages
and tho latter ordered new trial before jury
new trial was had before Justice OGOrman, and
verdict for the plaintiff for 100000 was rendered 1t
Is on the appeal from this verdict that the GeDcra
Term has just passed
The opinion of the court IS written by Justice In
graham who holds that in continuing to send dis
patches through the defendant company after the al
legged breach OF contract and in suing for the amount
due under the contract, the plaintiff clearly made all
election to proceed under the contract and hold the
defendant to a compliance with its terms, and not 10
treat the contract broken and at end" and the
plaintiff having elected 10 affirm the contract as 1t was
is bound by that election" Tho finding on the first
cause Of action is declared to be adjudication that
the contract in force between the parties up TO
June 3D. 15o2 In conclusion the Judge says
at being thus established that there was no breach
of the contract by tho defendant prior to June %,
1882, and as the evidence falls to disclose that tho
defendants committed any breach of the contract after
June 80, or after that date did any act which could
be construed into refusal to perform the contract,
but on the contrary shows that June % the plaintiff
voluntarily ceased business under the contract because
he had money TO carry on business, am OF The
opinion that tho plaintiff failed to establish breach
OF the contract 10y the defendant, and without con
sdering the other seriOs questions presented by tho
appeal think the judgment should be reversed, and
q now trial ordered with costs to abide the event"
The decision is cOncurrcd IN by Justice Freedman on
the ground stated by Justice lngraham Chief Judge
scdgwick places his concurrence On another ground
He says:
u am of the opinion that the damages were OK
ccSsve, and that ground agree with Judge lnGra-
ham in the result stated by him"
George W. Miller represented the plaintiff, and Cen
eral Wager Swaync and Edward Patterson appeared
for the defendant.